Reinforcement Learning for Factored Markov Decision Processes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Learning to act optimally in a complex, dynamic and noisy environment is a hard prob-lem. Various threads of research from reinforcement learning, animal conditioning, oper-ations research, machine learning, statistics and optimal control are beginning to come together to offer solutions to this problem. I present a thesis in which novel algorithms are presented for learning the dynamics, learning the value function, and selecting good actions for Markov decision processes. The problems considered have high-dimensional factored state and action spaces, and are either fully or partially observable. The ap-proach I take is to recognize similarities between the problems being solved in the rein-forcement learning and graphical models literature, and to use and combine techniques from the two fields in novel ways. In particular I present two new algorithms. First, the DBN algorithm learns a compact representation of the core process of a partially observable MDP. Because inference in the DBN is intractable, I use approximate inference to maintain the belief state. A belief-state action-value function is learned using reinforcement learning. I show that this DBN algorithm can solve POMDPs with very large state spaces and useful hidden state.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".